The point of the PE change that took place last time was to make the game MORE open, but I guess that got forgot when the 11-12 players came out.

I'm pretty sure Shaq wasn't anywhere near 300lbs in 1993.

He actually was very near 300lbs - he just had an incredibly low % of body fat, but that's beside the point. It's really dumb.
If h/w play such a role, then why isn't Barkley 100% at SG? 6'4" that's not even 100% at SF (the position he played on defense most of the time even though he was 100% at PF). Oh... it's because of the statistical roles... Like how PF and C are virtually the same position now, yet there are so many guys that are 100% C that aren't even close at PF. For example, Wilt, one of the most athletic players of all time (he ran track, did high jump, etc. He wasn't this lumbering, slow giant like Shaq after he got fat), is not 100% at PF (or even higher than 90). But whatever. I'd honestly like to see every player 100% at at least 2 positions. Then I could fulfill the "What If?" principle of ... what if Shaq & Wilt played on the court together? Or Wilt & Gilmore. Or Wilt & Kareem. Or Wilt & Wilt!

A quick look at some defensive ratings: The three best defensive wings in the league (INPO) are 75, 76, and 83 (thats Iggy, LBJ, and Trick or Treat Tony). Now, lets look at some notables below 70 (just for comparison, Brandon Wright (now one of my favorite sixth men in the database because of this and his otherwise fantastic season) is a 97; Sasha Pavlovic is a 79, Derrick Rose is a 75, hell Cole Aldrich is an 83 (albeit anything can happen in <300 minutes (see Jeremy Lin's perfect 100 in 2010-11))):

Below 70(.1): KG, Camby, Howard, CP3, Rondo,Leonard, Asik (could be in the 90s), JOAKIM NOAH (67, you shitting me?), Thabo Sefolosha?, TYSON CHANDLER, TYSON CHANDLER, TYSON CHANDLER, um, Shawn Marion, Varejao, Luol Deng (58, hmmm apparently derrick rose is the best defender in chicago's starting lineup??????), Avery Bradley (53, yeah, 53), Pierce (51), Grant Hill is tied with Vlad Radmanovic and Lester Hudson, oh yeah and the defensive player of the year (60) is tied with Steph Curry, Kirk Hinrich, and Yi Jianlian. Not sure how the Defensive ratings are done but goddamit, I'd been looking forward to these stats coming out for weeks, planning who I thought would be good values (like say Chandler having one of the all time great seasons from an extremely low usage player, or Lebron James having one of the best seasons ever and then (and I was expecting mid-low 90s at least for both of them) and then this. Still love the site but the basketball portion is starting to look more and more like a ******* wasteland especially in the face of the leaps and bounds of progress in the basketball statistical analysis department happening all the time now (that sentence made more sense in my head :) ). This site could be fantastic as the world starts to embrace basketball analytics this decade the way they did with baseball and SABRmetrics last, but it seems like there is no effort being put in at all.

plus if they did do that just about everybody would complain about how arbitrary it was to just manually adjust the defensive rating of a nobody schlep like Russell based only and solely on the opinion and testimony of everybody who knows anything about the game basketball

- There's literally no possible system for effectiveness or defensive rating that will please everyone. Sure we could go through and subjectively change some guys, but that goes against the statistical nature of the game and wouldn't be based on any factual data. I believe an objective (albeit imperfect) system is still better than a subjective system with arbitrary numbers being assigned.

- Height and weight are factored into effectiveness, in case that wasn't a widely known fact.

- I understand that seeing anything less than 100% is a turnoff for most coaches here, but in reality, effectiveness in the upper 90% range is not going to be big deal in game results.

- Just to clarify, there were no changes to any of the formulas or logic for players this year.

- It's easy to adjust listed positions, so if you see any of those that are off just send in a support ticket and we'll review those.

"Sure we could go through and subjectively change some guys, but that goes against the statistical nature of the game and wouldn't be based on any factual data. "

Kind of like what you did with Bill Russell by giving him a laughable number of blocks considering the pace of the game? And Wilt for that matter, but Russell's are worse.

"- I understand that seeing anything less than 100% is a turnoff for most coaches here, but in reality, effectiveness in the upper 90% range is not going to be big deal in game results. "

9 0 is not high 90s. It's ridiculous that any Wilt before his injury in 69 is not at least 97 or 98 at PF (should be 100%). Tim Duncan is 100% PF... Wilt is waaaaaaaay more athletic than Duncan ever could even dream of being. Even Shaq pre 2000s was much more athletic than Duncan at any point in his career.

Honestly, there should be no difference in PF & C in the sim. The two positions have become essentially the same position in the NBA. At no point will anybody be able to "take advantage" of anybody by playing any current PF at C or any current C at PF. It's just something we'd like to be able to do for variety. So why not do it? You really, really should think about this one.

6'11" with 90% of fga's in the paint

is 10 points more of a PF than

7' with only 68% of shots in the paint and can also handle the ball better?

We're not asking you to go through 1 by 1 and make adjustments. We are asking you to change the way you categorize players entirely.